¶1(concurring and dissenting):
¶2120 I concur in the majority's analysis of the tampering with a withess conviction.
¶3T21 I do not, however, share the majority's analysis or result respecting the written false statement conviction. Since the indis-putedly erroneous instruction added language to the statute that made it uniquely applicable to the evidence in this case, suggesting that the jury could have found Defendant guilty under another section is a stretch that I cannot in good conscience make.
¶4$22 When tailoring a statute to fit the evidence is coupled with a failure to define the mental state required for conviction, I believe the Defendant has clearly established plain error, and his conviction for written false statement should also be reversed.